How would one remove the uncertainty principals from the small world but to have considered the probability density distributions? Below is a link that I saw early in my investigations that I had wondered, forced me to look at what could have been happening within the cosmo with events, that would release information into the bulk?

If string theory, in the Kaluza Klein tower energy determinations could have discriptively spoken to the particle natures, why was it not possible to map the nature of these particles, in gravitational information released from these cosmological events?

If information in the bulk has been released, then this information has been geometrically defined in the gravity waves that we would percieve here on earth? Ligo would have performed its ability to then map the configurations that we see happening in that same cosmos. What made this visualization interesting is if photon release was specific to electromagnetic events held to the brane, then our perception of this energy, would have been left for us to consider in those same gravitational waves?

One had to know at a deeper level how we might have engaged the cyclical universe? Could bubble nucleation fall in line with the ideas about the origins of this universe and find itself too part of this creative scenario?

Colliding branes had to have some recognition in the world that we would have considered, bubble nucleation, as manifesting itself over and over again within the confines of our own universe now? Would this have made it likely that such manifestions really go to the source of what could have begun, has always been and wil continue to evolve, in this cycle of birth death and being reborn?

Neil Turok

The Myth of the Beginning of Time

The new willingness to consider what might have happened before the big bang is the latest swing of an intellectual pendulum that has rocked back and forth for millenia. In one form or another, the issue of the ultimate beginning has engaged philosophers and theologians in nearly every culture. It is entwined witha grand set of concerns, one famosly encapsulated in a 1897 painting by Paul Gauguin: D'ou venons? Que sommes-nous? Ou allons-nous?Scientific America, The Time before Time, May 2004

I tend to think if one can orientate the thinking that is developing, it is not to hard to see where we might develope further perspectives, as they have been outlined in article and in articles that I have presented for consideration.

This idea of Quantum geometry being revealled in quantum geometricization is a valuable insight that Greene offers to us. Continues, to speak to Einstein revelations, much as Smolin does in his own theoretics.

"But now, almost a century after Einstein's tour-de-force, string theory gives us a quantum-mechanical discription of gravity that, by necessity, modifies general relativity when distances involved become as short as the Planck length. Since Reinmannian geometry is the mathetical core of general relativity, this means that it too must be modified in order to reflect faithfully the new short distance physics of string theory. Whereas general relativity asserts that the curved properties of the universe are described by Reinmannian geometry, string theory asserts this is true only if we examine the fabric of the universe on large enough scales. On scales as small as planck length a new kind of geometry must emerge, one that aligns with the new physics of string theory. This new geometry is called, quantum geometry."

The Elegant Universe, by Brian Greene, pg 231 and Pg 232

Many claim a commercialization of the work current technologies are spoken to here(?) of researchers respective corners. That piece meal information is feed to the public, does not do its justice? If such, "cut and paste" values would institute a perspective view of what has been reveallled with some consistancy, then one has done their job in getting to the source valuation and recognitions of the limitations now affecting theoretics and physic alike?

To me this is one of the greatest achievements of mathematical structures that one could encounter, It revolutionize many a view, that been held to classical discriptions of reality.

In the quiet achievement of Riemann’s tutorial teacher Gauss, recognized the great potential in his student. On the curvature parameters, we recognize in Gauss’s work, what would soon became apparent? That we were being lead into another world for consideration?

So here we are, that we might in our considerations go beyond the global perspectives, to another world that Einstein would so methodically reveal in the geometry and physics, that it would include the electromagnetic considerations of Maxwell into a cohesive whole and beyond.

The intuitive development that we are lead through geometrically asks us to consider again, how Riemann moved to a positive aspect of the universe?

If we triangulate Omega, the universe in which we are in, Omegam(mass)+ Omega(a vacuum), what position geometrically, would our universe hold from the coordinates given?

If such a progression is understood in the evolution of the geometry raised in non euclidean perspectives, this has in my view raised the stakes on how we percieve the dynamical valuation of a world that we were lead into from GR?

Facing the frontier of cosmological proportions, we soon meet views as demonstrated in the Solvay meetings where the thought experiments plague the relation of Quantum Mechanics. Even though Einstein held his position about the beauty of GR( it's stand alone feature) in it's own right, did not mean that the efforts to quantization had not been considered by him?

Moving to the non-euclidean realm, set up my thinking in terms of gravitational considerations. Dali's example of the tesserack reveals a deeper understanding of this progression to an non-euclidean view that Dali heightened in this aspect of religiousness and God implication, by demonstrating the Crucifixation paintng that he did. Even Escher in his realization, understood that the royal road to geometry has some road(physics) to travel before it could meet his perspective eye.

The reason for this post was triggered by what can be found at Lubos Motl's site One will have to watch the interaction and information that is presenting itself in the comments that come, and maybe we can build from this?

When I looked at Glast, it seemed a fine way in which to incorporate one more end of the "spectrum" to how we see the cosmo? That we had defined it over this range of possibilties? How could we move further from consideration then, and I fall short in how the probabilties of how we might percieve graviton exchange of information in the bulk could reveal more of that spectrum? A resonance curve?

If one alters their perspective in terms of resonantial features(using string theory concepts as a quantum mechanical discription of the spacetime), how would we measure these changes in planck epoch ( deeper then gamma ray detection)? Can this be done?

Friday, November 26, 2004

All those who have written histories bring to this point their account of the development of this science. Not long after these men came Euclid, who brought together the Elements, systematizing many of the theorems of Eudoxus, perfecting many of those of Theatetus, and putting in irrefutable demonstrable form propositions that had been rather loosely established by his predecessors. He lived in the time of Ptolemy the First, for Archimedes, who lived after the time of the first Ptolemy, mentions Euclid. It is also reported that Ptolemy once asked Euclid if there was not a shorter road to geometry that through the Elements, and Euclid replied that there was no royal road to geometry. He was therefore later than Plato's group but earlier than Eratosthenes and Archimedes, for these two men were contemporaries, as Eratosthenes somewhere says. Euclid belonged to the persuasion of Plato and was at home in this philosophy; and this is why he thought the goal of the Elements as a whole to be the construction of the so-called Platonic figures. (Proclus, ed. Friedlein, p. 68, tr. Morrow)

It was interesting to me that I find some thread that has survived through the many centuries , that moves through the hands of individuals, to bring us to a interesting abstract world that few would recognize.

Of interest, is that some line of departure from the classical defintions, would have followed some road of developement, that I needed to understand how this progression became apparent. For now such links helped to stabilize this process and the essence of the departure form this classical defintion needed a culmination reached in Einstein's General Relativity. But long before this road was capture in it's essence, the predecessors in this projective road, develope conceptual realizations and moved from some point. To me, this is the fifth postulate. But before I draw attention there I wanted to show the index of this same projective geometry.

The progression through these geometries leads to global perspectives that are not limited to the thread that moves through these cultures and civilizations. The evolution dictates that having reached Einstein GR that we understand that the world we meet is a dynamical one and with Reason, we come t recognize the Self Evident Truths.

At this point, having moved through the geometrical phases and recognitions, the physics of understanding have intertwined mathematical realms associated with Strings and loop and other means, in which to interpret that dynamical world called the Planck Length(Quantum Gravity).

Thursday, November 25, 2004

I'd like to embrace all those who are attempting to speak in regards to quantum gravity. This is a common poem, that reflects the efforts and differing perspectives at trying to descibe a world that is very much in the understanding below the planck epoch.

If we acknowledge the structural integrity that we assign strings and loops this then can embrace solidified positions, to the understanding that we may differ in those same positions. Logically the perspectives are even displayed very nicely in this poem? Wall, Spear, Snake, Tree, Fan, and Rope.

What taste comes to mind, and we have this same inabiltiy to express the intangible yet we have engaged mathematically something very real?

The Blind Men and the ElephantJohn Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

It was six men of IndostanTo learning much inclined,Who went to see the Elephant(Though all of them were blind),That each by observationMight satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,And happening to fallAgainst his broad and sturdy side,At once began to bawl:"God bless me! but the ElephantIs very like a WALL!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,Cried, "Ho, what have we here,So very round and smooth and sharp?To me 'tis mighty clearThis wonder of an ElephantIs very like a SPEAR!"

The Third approached the animal,And happening to takeThe squirming trunk within his hands,Thus boldly up and spake:"I see," quoth he, "the ElephantIs very like a SNAKE!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand, And felt about the knee"What most this wondrous beast is likeIs mighty plain," quoth he:"'Tis clear enough the ElephantIs very like a TREE!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,Said: "E'en the blindest manCan tell what this resembles most;Deny the fact who can,This marvel of an ElephantIs very like a FAN!"

The Sixth no sooner had begunAbout the beast to grope,Than seizing on the swinging tailThat fell within his scope,"I see," quoth he, "the ElephantIs very like a ROPE!"

And so these men of IndostanDisputed loud and long,Each in his own opinionExceeding stiff and strong,Though each was partly in the right,And all were in the wrong!

The images produce here of bubble formation are most pleasing to me, about what could have emerge from that early universe. If stringy components were evident and cosmic clumping rvealed as in previous post then how would such images lead to bubble nucleations as stringy cosmological patterns?

For such ideas to emerge in thinking there had to be a time when such conditions were conducive to bubble nucleation? Such energy considerations had to provide for these considerations to emerge so. How so?

It was important for me to recognize the microcosmic view, could have been united with cosmological proportions, and revealled structural integrity to the way in which the universe was formed. If such views were manifesting from planck Epoch realizations, then it really was kind of easy to see how such conceptualizations might have revealled themselves in stringy ways? I have deferred from brane considerations( this is most interestng to me of holographical proportions that such branes could intersect themselves to coordinated references?) at this point to explore this unusual unversal explanation.

A lot of times it seems the general concept is far fleeting from educated minds that in a laymen's way I wanted to put forward a generalized view from information gathered. I hope this summation is correct?

Without some dynamical realization of that early universe it wouldn't make much sense not to consider the deepening revelation of how we percieve that Window on the Universe? Kip Thorne's early introspective views have become interesting ways in which to interpret that same universe, with Ligo and other means. From Wheelers day, it was important to understand this developement, along with Bells Theorem.

How could we not have considered the temeprature values of that same early universe and not wondered about the nature of supergravity associated with these energy considerations? How else might we understand resonance curve?

The more I read about Ramanujan I was attracted to the idea of him being able to predict outcomes devised in some general mathematical way that seemed easy to him, but in the case of the Taxi Cab and Hardy's question, what was the nature of the taxi cab's number?

When looking through this infomration I come across interesting perspectives about such a man whose culture was far away from the society of currents math and physics. Who developed logically, through his own study. This is a intersting case to me of what could be brought to a world steep in mathematical structures. CRanks or not, whohave found joy in peering into a world that few would cosider in their day to day lives.

There is something deeper here that has caught my attention. The Harmonical nature permeates my thoughts, about the extra dimensions and how we could look at the bulk?

If such thinking went beyond the two points and our focus was drawn to the space in between, what would such a nature exemplified by such harmonical attributes? Would it not have made one wonder how the world would seem in ways that our current perceptions are not accustomed too? How would Ramanujan fit here, as a emergent property of strings?

I was interested in how this man came to think and I place this here for consideration from another poster.

DickWell, in Ramanujans case we have some clues.

He spent his teenage years studying and mastering one book, on analytical function theory and analytical number theory (which are joined at birth). The format of the book was step by step: it started with (x-y)(x+y)=x2 - y2. You proved that and then came a slightly harder theorem of the same kind, in which the proof uses the first theorem, and so on one result building on another up to the state of the art as it was when the book was published (1880s). The book was intended to prepare or "cram" Cambridge students for the math exam known as the Tripos.

Ramanujan became not just familiar with the math in this book, it became his environment.

A recent author has suggested that math ability derives from the brain abilities used in social understanding. Think of living in a tribe or small town where "everybody knows everybody". By growing up in such an environment you know not only everyone else's name, but their preferences and personal characteristics. You are freely able to think what so-and-so and such-and-such would talk about if they had a conversation. And it is proposed that mathematicians have this same ability, only with the abstract things they think about and discuss, rather than people.

And so Ramanujan's "town" was the complex number system and the various peculiar things that could happen there. This was the focus of his imagination throughout his growing up and it is scarcely surprising that he was able to see relationships that more lazily prepared mathematicians (including great ones like Hardy) could not.

You don't have to postulate extra dimension, the depth of the human capabilities is sufficient.

As you can see Dick rejected the idea that such information could have settle in any mind, from a fifth dimensional consideration, and the extra dimensions, as he has stated. It just made sense to me, that solid things, had other information that it concealed. The harmonical nature was not only limited to the numbers and oscillations?

The Planck Epoch to now, contained interesting information. Should we find some structure to contain it all, and yet, find that this structured world is not limited to such structures alone? It was just a pattern, and one of many?

Sunday, November 21, 2004

Here is one of two methods that help explain. The next post will follow tomorrow if I have time. The complexity of the pictures involved is linked down below in Fig 15-17. This will give some generalizations that I had been looking too, to comprehend the model of strings and its geometrical discriptions.

Unfortunately I lost the link to this quote and if someone could remember seeing this, I hope you will let me know.

We expect that the divergences of quantum gravity would similarly be resolved by introducing the correct short-distance description that captures the new physics. Although years of effort have been devoted to finding such a description, only one candidate has emerged to describe the new short-distance physics: superstrings. Vibrational modes

This theory requires radically new thinking. In superstring theory, the graviton (the carrier of the force of gravity) and all other elementary particles are vibrational modes of a string (figure 1). The typical string size is the Planck length, which means that, at the length scales probed by current experiments, the string appears point-like.

The jump from conventional field theories of point-like objects to a theory of one-dimensional objects has striking implications. The vibration spectrum of the string contains a massless spin-2 particle: the graviton. Its long wavelength interactions are described by Einstein's theory of General Relativity. Thus General Relativity may be viewed as a prediction of string theory!

This highlighted print tells us a lot, about the higher dimensional values assigned to spacetime as being a result. If we were to entertain the holographical consideration of these higher spaces manifesting into the spacetime curvature, that we have come to know and love, then we have indeed not only used Klein to travel to the fifth dimension but have come back home, to what GR represents for us a sa tangible?

I think sometimes the road begun existed before many of our own perspectives were added for considerations, so although we find that Einstein argue the simplicity and beauty of GR as it is, and rejected the quantum mechanical nature of the world, he did not reject the extensions of his thoughts to lead to other things. Some might of called this a mistake as well?

General consistancy of mathematics and numerical correlation, that unite, seem very plausible tools for recognition? Even if the mathematician, has divorced himself from the real world and said, it fits? Do they not become the Lewis Carroll's and paint pretty pictures for us of a implausible world when they move into this abstract world of mathematics, without joining the physics? Einstein and Kaluza did this for us? There mathematics worked, and why not the Kaluza's consideration to extra dimensions?

Let there be light! How could we not see that if the extra dimension was added how relevant might such unification have spoken to electromagnetism and gravity?

So, what is the value of PI, if a "point" on the brane holds previous information about the solid things we see in our universe now? Have we recognized the momentum states, represented by the KK Tower and the value of 1R as it arises from the planck epoch?

With some certainty I understood that gamma ray detection woud have easily directed our perspective of information of cosmological events, but imagine, if we are faced with so much information, how we would resolve all possible outcomes?

Classically the world of computerization would rest easy knowing that it has been modelled on the perspective of gamma ray detection, but if we raised the question of Gerard t'Hooft's thinking now, could we ever assign computerization, to quantum mechanical realities of strings? We would have then mastered the realm of unpredictability?